 |
|
 |














 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| From: (Anonymous) |
Date: February 17th, 2008 04:38 pm (UTC) |
| (Link) |
Few questions
|
Thank you for creating an informative site. I am currently reasearching all religions for a better awareness of the world. I am an athiest and leaning towards Buddhism. I however find things that need more explanation on your page:
"The Satanist [...] should have the ability to decide what is just" - Satanic Bible7
The problem is with what the individual classifies as just. They might classify the victim of their hate as worthy of it even though the victim is "undeserving" and really an object of jealousy.
Also the words "destroy them" which implicates to kill/ ruin them. For which actions could you justify destroying them in some way. Certainly the consequence you should provide for their action shouldn't be worse than the original action.
"Do not complain about anything to which you need not subject yourself"
Shouldn't Satanism embrace the concept of people to get involved in issues, i.e. - political (ie feminism)/ moral debates. If you aren't part of the solution, your part of the problem.
The term "legalistic sheep." like your treating them like a conformist. I agree people should be able to do what they want when they want as long as they aren't hurting someone else. At which point are they still called conformists, some rules are more significant than others.
I however, particularly like the "Religions and Ethics" 3 paragraphs in which you make a point very relevent to all religions and are honest about your interpretations.
"If a guest in your lair annoys you, treat him cruelly and without mercy" "annoy" seems a rather trivial word to provoke "cruelly" and "without mercy". Do tell me what "annoys" entails.
Again I like another section "Criticism of the Ethic of Reciprocity" which bring attention to egotistical people.
Your section on sex is also very insightful. I do not condemn people for their tastes as long as they are safe.
In "Stratification" you say "supports the weak at the expense of the strong". Exactly what do you mean by this statement? What do you mean by weak? Physically weak? Socially weak?
Maybe I'm being too harsh because I'm a firm believer in compassion and forgiveness. Indeed I'm probably not the best person to comment being a vegetarian activist.
However, I take a strong stance, along with you against christianity, islam, judaism etc. However, i don't dislike their followers...I dislike the religion itself and how it paves the way for extremism from different interpretations. However, when religious people look at your site I'm assuming at least you want to inform them and wreck the previous perceptions. But worded differently you might create a deeper interest in some.
Love yah (comment habit...haha. Spread the love) xx
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|

|  |
 |

|
 |